Now, you see, your stance is predicated on the believe that our voting has: A.) Value, in that what you do makes a difference B.) Choice, in that your two real options are any different C.) Ability for change, in that the system itself works, but it just needs someone to effect that change from what's happening now. I do not believe our system provides any of these things. I believe for any of these to happen, a revolution would be necessary to overthrow everything we currently have, and furthermore, I do not believe the people of our country have the will or ability to do that.
I'd like to address this, if I may. First, "value." Off the top of my head, - The 2000 presidential election was ultimately decided by 537 votes. - The 2004 Washington gubernatorial election was decided by 129 votes. - Al Franken won in Minnesota in 2008 by 312 votes. Yes - it seems more "capricious" than "valuable" but that's the thing - you never know when your vote is going to count so you might as well act like it always counts. Because keep in mind - your neighborhood is full of old people. They likely vote differently than you. And voting is the highlight of their day, their week, their month - it's a social occasion beyond compare, and their chance to stick it to those goddamn liberal kids that keep playing their hippity hoppity music. If all you do is negate one of them, you've done a good deed. Finally, it's not like you trudged four hours across the steppe to cast your ballot. All 50 states allow some form of absentee voting. Do what I do - gather with your loved ones, pour a glass of wine, and go through that ream of election flyers while paging through the Internet. You can make an absolutely informed decision in like 20 minutes tops, on every issue down to circuit court judges. Shit, get your friends over and order pizza. My uncle's family has done it that way since before absentee ballots became the rage. Democrats, republicans, libertarians, pizza and beer. You wanna see a lively party, discuss ballot measures with the opposing side over cocktails. It's a trip. Next, "choice." Your options are likely not as different as you'd like, but it's easy and flippant to argue that they're the same. Do you really think McCain and Palin would have run the country the same way Obama did? Do you really think Al Gore would have run the country the same way as George W. Bush? It matters down to your local legislators - know them, understand them, see who endorses them and why. Politics, like real estate, is a game played by people who suck at everything else. It's about the most transparent spectator sport ever seen. If you can't pick out a difference or two between any two candidates - and extrapolate what that difference might mean - you aren't paying attention. Finally, "change." There are now more people living in states where gay marriage is legal than states where it isn't. White men can marry black women. Marijuana is steadily becoming legal. Does the system always benefit you? Does it work at the speed you want it to? Is it utterly beyond reproach? No to all three... but to pretend that it's a lose-lose situation is just the sort of apathy that permits people to be elected by a hundred and twenty nine fuckin' votes. Finally, there's this: If you don't participate in that most basic, most simple, most painless and most easy of civic duties, you have no right, absolutely no right, to bitch about the consequences of your inaction. Fuckin' vote. Y'all act like it's an insult to be asked your opinion about who should run the country for you. Yeah, they're asking everyone else, too, and you might not get your way but if you don't even open your mouth how the fuck do you think you're entitled to a say in the matter?
Don't get me wrong: I agree with you on everything here. I vote in every single election. It makes even more of a difference since I'm still registered in California, so I can vote for my third party candidates without worrying that I'll be allowing a right wing nutjob to get a lead over the Democrat that I, while don't believe will do much more, at least provides the conversation and the ideas that should be in the public's conscious. It's dangerous without liberal ideas being discussed and considered. The people quickly revert back to horrid conservative ideals. I've watched it happen over the last six years on reddit as our country has gotten more and more conservative. That's not a world I want. My point isn't about voting, it's about the entirety of the Democratic and governmental system of America being broken. Voting is still fucking important, no matter how little it might actually do in the end in this system, that amount might make all the difference. Never assume Gore would be just as bad as W. Never assume Mitt would be better than Obama. That said, the first election I really cared about was 2000. Seeing that, I completely understand people believing voting is meaningless. Gore winning very well could have been-- and I truly believe it would-- the difference between America having a prosperous future and what we have now. That it came down to... That... I don't put it past anyone to consider it futile. I think they're wrong, but I can't blame them.
Both accurate and flippant at the same time. Since nobody here is ever going to be a Supreme Court justice, it's more fair to say that, through the byzantine and outdated system we call the electoral college, 537 votes ended up counting more than the entire state of Montana.
Sorry. Didn't mean to be flip. I have a bitterness about that election that I've never been able to reconcile. At the time, it felt like we were subject to one of those "elections" of dictators, where thee outcome is guaranteed in advance by some shadowy figures. Of course you're correct that they wouldn't have been able to pull this off had the race not been so close. One can only obfuscate so much.
You and me both, buddy. The one that really pisses me off is 2004, though. I mean, at least Gore fought. 2004 had all the election fraud 2000 did but Kerry just rolled the fuck over. I probably spent 200 hours on that election. I haven't recovered from my jadedness. I even bought a bottle of cask-strength MacAllan to celebrate Kerry's victory, and didn't drink any until Obama was in office... and I'm here to tell ya that cask-strength MacAllan is actually pretty gross.
Word to that. Bought a bottle for a friend as a way of saying thanks for a favor. I had wanted to try it for a while and it came highly recommended to me by a colleague. We tried it out New Years 2003... it still sits on his liquor shelf to this day -- the only loss to evaporation.I'm here to tell ya that cask-strength MacAllan is actually pretty gross.
Uhh... thanks for the recipe? Your reply sounds a bit condescending and combative. Don't know if you meant it that way. I never said hate, and it's not my bottle -- I no longer live in the same state as the guy who seems to be storing it till doomsday. If I was the one who owned it, rest assured it would not have lasted long. It's bad but it ain't that bad. More disappointing and absolutely outclassed by others in the price range. And if I have a choice, I'm choosing something else every time. Just so you know, I do actually know my way around a bar (and a kitchen). I was the chef and part owner of a successful fine dining house for 7 years. Been a working chef for over 17. I'm on a bit of a hiatus for the present but, I have a fairly good grasp of what you can do with liquor.
Guy I gave it to is a bit weird anyway. He's rich as shit (born into it) and he doesn't drink all that much. He REALLY didn't like the MacCask. He has options. He won't touch it. He feels no sense of obligation to drink it. Although he does occasionally try to get others to drink it, he has never succeeded.
My comment was directed at everyone I have ever met who, in the midst of me explaining any number of superb cocktails involving Scotch (or even just a dash of water to bring out the flavor! which you're supposed to do!), scoffed and said, "Real Scotch drinkers don't mix their Scotch. What a waste. I know more about this than you." It's one of my secret ways I decide whether I shouldn't ever talk to someone again, actually.
It's a good filtering system. Comments like "Real ______ never do this" reek of elitism and pretentiousness. It usually also denote's someone who just got into the scene of whatever it is they are prattling on about. One of the first things you learn (or should learn anyway) when you open a restaurant is: never scoff at the ways people enjoy their food and drink. No matter how counterintuitive it may appear. If that's what they want and they are paying for it; who am I to criticize? And sometimes some of the off the wall shit they suggest is brilliant. Nope, life is too short to go around looking down on others because they enjoy a well done Niman ranch filet or cocktail sauce with their oysters. And cocktails using Scotch? Nothing wrong with that. Just a different way of enjoying a drink.It's one of my secret ways I decide whether I shouldn't ever talk to someone again, actually.
Fine dining. Worked in some fast food and chain places as a teen. Went to culinary school (never go to culinary school). Worked in a couple of casinos, worked in a super crazy restaurant that should have been fine dining and was... in the 50's, then I worked at a real fine dining place, then another, then another. Then opened my own place with 2 friends/business partners. At my place we did what they call California cuisine (which is just a seasonal menu using fresh ingredients, apparently that was such a novel idea in the 80's that it required it's own name). I based my menu on classical french techniques with a fairly broad Mediterranean influence. I incorporated stuff from France, Spain, Italy, Germany as well as Morocco, Greece, Lebanon. Are you into dining?